Nadal - The Future Looks Bright

First topic message reminder :

This interview throws a brighter spin on Nadal's future compared with some of the gloom that is being spread. But then if you will read the Daily Mail... Pfft!

But did you win your 7th title in Roland Garros with an injured knee?

"The problem started in February, at Indian Wells. I was forced to miss the semi-final in Miami but came back stronger in Roland Garros, where I played the semi-final with just some infiltration. I won because at the time I was playing some of the best tennis in my career. But the injury got worse again in Halle and the week before Wimbledon it was absolutely terrible. It was only after that I discovered I had suffered a tear.”

Admit it, you are slightly afraid of never being able to play tennis professionally again, aren't you?

"My injury (Hoffa’s syndrome) hasn’t ever forced anyone into retirement from the sport. The future looks bright. I’m still 26, I still love competing, I still love tennis. If anything, this season has been one of the seasons I’ve enjoyed playing tennis the most. I’ll try as hard as possible to get back playing again. And I’ve always worked hard all my life. I’m not foolish enough to believe I can play well enough to start winning again straight away, especially with the level of competition in tennis so high at the moment. But I’ve been at the top of the sport for 8 seasons and 3 months ago I won Roland Garros – so why should things suddenly change after 5 months out of the game? I've the same motivation as before and the same faith in my ability and desire to work hard: why shouldn’t I get back to where I was before in the sport?”

But will you be able to play on the hard courts again?

"I don’t believe I’ll be able to avoid playing on hard courts, especially as 2 Grand Slam tournaments [the US Open and the Australian Open – Ed] and a lot of other top tournaments are played on the surface, but I know I need to play on clay courts more, as that'll help my knee. I’m not only saying this now, as I’ve said it a lot of times over the past 3 years and during the ATP tour, but it’s a mistake to play so many tournaments on hard courts: I don’t see many football players or basketball players playing on the surface day in, day out. I can’t do anything to change what has happened to me, but I can do something for future generations. Playing on hard courts is very damaging for the knees, ankles and back. Unfortunately, the sport is dominated by business, by money and the upkeep of hard courts is much easier than the upkeep or grass or clay courts. The sport is heading in that direction and my feeling is that it’s a mistake. But that’s just my opinion.”

So, when do you think you’ll be back playing again?

"I don’ know whether it’ll take 3 weeks or 3 months. But I hope to play at the Australian Open, even if I hope I can be back even sooner, in Qatar. Who knows, perhaps I won’t be back until after, on the clay courts. But what I’m certain of is that after playing tennis in a certain way for 20 years I won’t be able to make any drastic changes to my style of play. You can change things slightly, something small here and there, adapt in certain ways, even in the way you stand on the court, as I’ve actually had to do. Before, I used to cover the court a lot, as it was the only way to pay against the top players. Now, I don’t cover the court as much as Djokovic. But that’s because I play a better style of tennis now.”

http://english.gazzetta.it/More_sports/25-09-2012/rafa-nadal-m-not-worried-ll-be-back-just-as-strong-as-ever-912718555671.shtml

Legend do you have to go ROTLA on people who don't agree with you, IMBL is right you are worse than Tenez was mind numbingly repetive but he was never abusive with posters who disagreed with him.

socal do you have to talk out of your rectum?

socal1976 wrote:Legend do you have to go ROTLA on people who don't agree with you, IMBL is right you are worse than Tenez was mind numbingly repetive but he was never abusive with posters who disagreed with him.

IMBL don't you find it ironic that on another forum you moaned about double standards

What do they say about people throwing stones in glass houses.....

legendkillarV2 wrote:IMBL don't you find it ironic that on another forum you moaned about double standards

What's ironic?
There were double standards because ROTLA and WOW were not treated fairly there. To be fair, I think the chances of a moderator banning himself at my call was always unlikely, irrelevant of how water-tight my argument was.
What's that got to do with v2?
Edit: Certainly it doesn't excuse the fact I think you are a bit aggressive to posters such as HE, Socal.

You comparing me with someone who you don't find pleasant? You find that justifiable?

Sorry IMBL any respect I had for you and your principles have gone out the window.

legendkillarV2 wrote:You comparing me with someone who you don't find pleasant? You find that justifiable?

Yes as Socal says you are disrespectful to certain posters.
I know I don't normally defend HE, but I am here. You are not fair with her, even though I know her claims about Murray are speculative.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:You comparing me with someone who you don't find pleasant? You find that justifiable?

Yes as Socal says you are disrespectful to certain posters.
I know I don't normally defend HE, but I am here. You are not fair with her, even though I know her claims about Murray are speculative.

Coming from someone who insults other posters?

Round and round go the contradictions.

And when did I say I don't find Tenez pleasant?
Certainly I never agreed with him, and pretty much everything he said had an agenda against Nadal (which was clear!), but he wasn't disrespectful to certain posters (like you are with HE).

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:You comparing me with someone who you don't find pleasant? You find that justifiable?

Yes as Socal says you are disrespectful to certain posters.
I know I don't normally defend HE, but I am here. You are not fair with her, even though I know her claims about Murray are speculative.

Coming from someone who insults other posters?

Round and round go the contradictions.

I'm sorry, who did I insult?

Edit: To make things clear, saying 'you are worse than Tenez' was not meant to be an insult.

While Tenez had an agenda against Nadal, he did not disrespect people like you disrespect HE. That's why I was annoyed.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:You comparing me with someone who you don't find pleasant? You find that justifiable?

Yes as Socal says you are disrespectful to certain posters.
I know I don't normally defend HE, but I am here. You are not fair with her, even though I know her claims about Murray are speculative.

Coming from someone who insults other posters?

Round and round go the contradictions.

I'm sorry, who did I insult?

socal.

Right if you actually read my post I told HE I didn't agree that Nadal is the biggest draw in tennis.

Simple.

No insulting of HE.

But because you went into fanboy mode like a fly on crap, you made a poor statement and socal got on his high horse too.

So like I said I won't address you or him on this forum or comment on your threads

legendkillarV2 wrote:

socal.

When did I insult Socal, I like Socal as a poster

legendkillarV2 wrote:
No insulting of HE.

Generally LK, you do not show HE respect. Maybe you do, but I've misread the situation, if that is the case, then apologies

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:You comparing me with someone who you don't find pleasant? You find that justifiable?

Yes as Socal says you are disrespectful to certain posters.
I know I don't normally defend HE, but I am here. You are not fair with her, even though I know her claims about Murray are speculative.

Coming from someone who insults other posters?

Round and round go the contradictions.

I'm sorry, who did I insult?

socal.

Right if you actually read my post I told HE I didn't agree that Nadal is the biggest draw in tennis.

Simple.

No insulting of HE.

But because you went into fanboy mode like a fly on crap, you made a poor statement and socal got on his high horse too.

So like I said I won't address you or him on this forum or comment on your threads

Good if you want to be mature you wouldn't take this tack or fly of the handle at IMBL. Trust me buddy neither of us is dying for your company. If you want to comment go ahead, if you don't, don't but I had no tolerance for Raiders abusiveness and I don't have much patience for your impersonation of him. Legend you and I are two of the oldest posters on this site, and it didn't have to be this way, but in my opinion you are the one who created this hostility and instead of taking some constructive criticism you double down and fly off the handle again proof positive of what I and IMBL have been saying.

I am not necessarily biased towards HE, in-fact I remember (Carreig, CC and other Murray fans can back me up as witnesses on this) criticising HE when I thought she was not treating Murray fairly.
But this time I though LK, you are being too hostile, generally making it an unpleasant atmosphere for her to post anything, remember you also falsely accused her of plagiarism and spamming at the start of the thread.

hawkeye wrote:socal. I think you are one of the few that are not arguing about the negative effects of playing on hard court. It is not only Nadal who is affected he is just the one doing the talking.

Of course relative cheapness and ease of maintenance make it advantageous especially for social play. But in a way I'm surprised that not more complaints are made by social players. Some of the strapping worn by the more "experienced" players suggests that damage is being inflicted even at this level. I am also surprised that parents don't demand something more user friendly for their children to play on. IMO at the very least some thought should go into creating or using surfaces that are less damaging.

Hawkeye most of the social players can't pay enough money to make playing on clay and grass courts economical. A grass court has do be resod after just a few hours of continous play or it gets even more dangerous than the worst hardcourt. A crappy grass court not only is unplayable but can be more damaging than a regular hard court. Without hardcourts tennis would be much more elite and expensive game and large segments of those participating wouldn't be participating now.

hawkeye wrote:socal. I think you are one of the few that are not arguing about the negative effects of playing on hard court. It is not only Nadal who is affected he is just the one doing the talking.

Of course relative cheapness and ease of maintenance make it advantageous especially for social play. But in a way I'm surprised that not more complaints are made by social players. Some of the strapping worn by the more "experienced" players suggests that damage is being inflicted even at this level. I am also surprised that parents don't demand something more user friendly for their children to play on. IMO at the very least some thought should go into creating or using surfaces that are less damaging.

Hawkeye most of the social players can't pay enough money to make playing on clay and grass courts economical. A grass court has do be resod after just a few hours of continous play or it gets even more dangerous than the worst hardcourt. A crappy grass court not only is unplayable but can be more damaging than a regular hard court. Without hardcourts tennis would be much more elite and expensive game and large segments of those participating wouldn't be participating now.

hawkeye wrote:laverfan. It has nothing to do with "playing styles" unless someone can learn how to hover.

Can you please elaborate? Do you remember Blue Clay in Madrid, perchance?

hawkeye wrote:laverfan. It has nothing to do with "playing styles" unless someone can learn how to hover.

I keep asking you to tell us about all the players who are injured on hard courts, and you keep just telling me they are hard.

Can you actually move on to showing all the injuries the tour is suffering?

Socal I still think the grass season should be made bigger

How about (for 10 Masters and 4 Grand Slams):
AO Clay
------------------
IW Grass
Miami Grass
------------------
Monte Carlo Clay
Rome Clay
Madrid Clay
French Open Clay
--------------------
Queens 1000 Grass
Halle 1000 Indoor Grass
Wimbledon Grass
-----------------------
Cincinatti HC
Toronto HC
US Open Indoor HC
Paris Indoor HC
---------------------------
WTF- Indoor Grass

So:
4 Masters on Grass
3 Masters on Clay
3 Masters on HC (1 indoor)

2 Slams on Clay
1 on Grass
1 on HC.

1 WTF on grass.

I know it's a long-shot, but I can always dream

bogbrush wrote:

hawkeye wrote:laverfan. It has nothing to do with "playing styles" unless someone can learn how to hover.

I keep asking you to tell us about all the players who are injured on hard courts, and you keep just telling me they are hard.

Can you actually move on to showing all the injuries the tour is suffering?

Good point Bogbrush. On Wikipedia it said hard courts are worse for the body, but I can't get the stats for injured players to back it up. It's not on the ATP website.

LF, can you do a spread, researching that from when Hard Courts became the most prominent used surface, how have the injury stats fluctuated. Count indoor and outdoor in one category, not sure the roof makes a big difference on the effect on the body.

Yeah that would not be anything I would oppose except for making the australian a clay event. A terrible idea in that heat. I like this to be the composition. 25 percent on grass, 25 percent clay, 25 outdoor hard, 25 percent indoor hard. I like the idea of making IW and Miami on grass. That would be sweet actually now that would impact the health of the players in a positive way. The players coul go from the end of january till early August and never set foot on hardcourt either to train or play. Because remember it isn't just the week of playing the tournament, players will be play on that surface before to practice if they can for the upcoming tournament.

This is all I have found so far:
http://www.matchstat.com/AllInjuries/

Sorry Bobgrush, but not much to compare with the 1980's.

socal1976 wrote:Yeah that would not be anything I would oppose except for making the australian a clay event. A terrible idea in that heat.

As Lydian said, that's not true.
Josiah brought this up earlier on another thread, and as usual Lydian was spot on

lydian wrote:
Hey? Running about in 40c is running about...and arguably cement absorbs and re-emits more heat than clay which can be watered down. It also doesnt stop Spaniards competing on it in their own country in the summer months when its as hot if not hotter than Australia....
Whereas in Spain it regularly gets into the 40c across July-August...I know because my parents live there (last year it was 45c in the shade when I visited) and its unbearable at times with high humidity too...but it doesnt stop the spaniards playing tennis tournaments.
AO is no hotter than places like Cincinnati where oncourt conditions are seriously oppressive with the huge humidity you get in the US.

So in a hot country like Spain why do they play on clay if its so oppressive

AO on grass wouldn't be a bad idea though.

It Must Be Love wrote:AO on grass wouldn't be a bad idea though.

I would support that before I would support changing it to clay, but frankly I think it is fine with the surface it has. A better change might be if you really want to favor fast court players would be to switch the AO to grass. Still I don't really see a case for why the AO has to be changed at all. I like the idea of switching IW and Miami to grass a lot. It would save months of hardcourt prepartation and play from the schedule for the players and for the viewers it is just two tournaments. The players however put a lot off effort into those back to back masters before the clay court season.

you wanna get high??

If we are purely talking about what is fair then clay has got more than enough tournaments as it is. Now if Rafa is a victim of hard court tennis then that is unfortunate but the whole schedule shouldn't just get changed because it hinders Rafa. Until we have a rash of top players complaining and getting injuries that threaten their career which they blame solely on hard courts then I see no harm in keeping things as they are.

I definitely wouldn't want the AO to be clay. The surface that gets played the least is grass, so if a hard court event or 2 were to change then surely it would be to grass before clay.

I understand all the maintenance issues, but I'm sure they'd earn enough to cover the costs. They will never change the surfaces at the slams now though. And I love the hard court events so I'm not too bothered if it stays the same to be honest.

I must admit I do find it very interesting that Rafa is saying there should be more clay events instead of hard. There are already plenty of clay events and hardly any grass events. So why clay and not grass? Doesn't sound like the most unbiased view I've ever heard.

Hard courts are tougher on the body I'm sure, but nobody is holding a gun to anyone to play all the hard court events. If you're worried about injury don't play them all. Don't go to Dubai. Don't play any non-mandatory tournaments on a hard court.

Well Danny I said that earlier.

If hard courts are causing Rafa's injury to worsen then it is simple - he must prioritise which hard court tournaments he feels he wants to enter. If it means he has to give three or four Masters Cup events on hard courts a miss so that he can play the slams (Australian Open and US Open) then so be it. However, if he chooses to carry on as before then he can't really complain if he knows the surface is no good to his knees. The option that is out is trying to re-organise the tour just to suit one player unless we have evidence that loads of other top tennis players have picked up career-threatening injuries on hard courts in recent years.

It Must Be Love wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

hawkeye wrote:laverfan. It has nothing to do with "playing styles" unless someone can learn how to hover.

I keep asking you to tell us about all the players who are injured on hard courts, and you keep just telling me they are hard.

Can you actually move on to showing all the injuries the tour is suffering?

Good point Bogbrush. On Wikipedia it said hard courts are worse for the body, but I can't get the stats for injured players to back it up. It's not on the ATP website.

LF, can you do a spread, researching that from when Hard Courts became the most prominent used surface, how have the injury stats fluctuated. Count indoor and outdoor in one category, not sure the roof makes a big difference on the effect on the body.

I will look and see what I can find in terms of injuries. The individual printable versions of draws are the only reliable source for such information.

CaladonianCraig & Danny_1982

Have you read the interview?

It Must Be Love

Ha ha! It's funny that there isn't detailed analysis on the ATP site of how damaging the most popular surface on the ATP tour is.

socal

Playing Indian Wells and Miami on grass would be great! But no way would all that money be spent if they thought they could get away with some cheap hard courts... I suppose there might be a slight bit of hope if a multi slam winning all time great was prepared to stick his neck out and speak up. But who would be brave enough to do it? Mmm...

legendkillarV2

Well I disagree. Nadal is arguably the biggest draw in tennis. Or if not the biggest then a very close second. It would make no sense for him to play on anything but the biggest stage. I'm sure he won't. Until he returns we will all just have to make do with analysing his every word.

HE - Fair point. He calls for a change but doesn't specifically say clay or grass. I'm sure I've heard him call for more clay tournaments before, but I can't find any evidence of it so I'll retract my (minor) criticism of him.

My hope is that the recovery period will allow for a 100% Rafa to take part in the full tour for a good few years yet. I want to see him Andy and Novak battling for years to come. That might be asking too much based on what he says about his future on hard courts, but I hope he can come back at the same level.

Danny_1982 wrote:
My hope is that the recovery period will allow for a 100% Rafa to take part in the full tour for a good few years yet. I want to see him Andy and Novak battling for years to come. That might be asking too much based on what he says about his future on hard courts, but I hope he can come back at the same level.

I hope so too
Let's hope Andy and Rafa have some more fantastic battles against each other in the future

And who knows, maybe the people who are gleeful he is injured and don't give a 'rat's ass' about him will one day be able to watch some glorious classics from Rafa and Andy, and change their mind.

I have said I wish him all the best and hope he gets back to where he was .I just don't buy into suggestions by posters to alter the circuit just to suit one player that is all.

I agree Craig that is one of the reasons I oppose all this talk of tinkering with the conditions. But I think IMBL makes a great suggestion. We have a camp of people that want to see variety and fast court tennis, I am not part of that group but I can see where they are coming from. Then you have everyone who wants to see healthier champions playing. Changing IW and Miami to grass would allow players to literally avoid playing on hardcourt, once they play the AO till August. I actually think then changing australia to grass would even magnify the impact.

Lets not forget not only does a player going into the big back to back masters play those events over 3 weeks they also spend many of them at least that long if not more time before those events training on hardcorts. Effectively if those two hardcourt events go to grass you wipe out nearly two months of hardcourt playing and training from the end of january till early April.

And i personally don't come from a position of bias as grass is Djoko's least favorite surface. But I would support greatly changing the first 3 big tournaments to grass. Aus, IW, and Miami; but no other messing with conditions and strings. If a massive 4000 points being added to the grass court season isn't enough for the fast court proponents I don't want is?

It Must Be Love wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:
My hope is that the recovery period will allow for a 100% Rafa to take part in the full tour for a good few years yet. I want to see him Andy and Novak battling for years to come. That might be asking too much based on what he says about his future on hard courts, but I hope he can come back at the same level.

I hope so too
Let's hope Andy and Rafa have some more fantastic battles against each other in the future

And who knows, maybe the people who are gleeful he is injured and don't give a 'rat's ass' about him will one day be able to watch some glorious classics from Rafa and Andy, and change their mind.

What "fantastic battles" are you talking about? The ones were Rafa crushed Murray or the ones were Murray battled an injured Rafa? I'm sorry if that sounds mean but I think some people need a reality check.

Danny_1982. You still perhaps are reading what you want to read from that interview. If you really are a Murray fan you should be worried about him lolloping about on hard courts considering he has such a huge 6'3" frame and plays an ultra defensive style based on retrieval. Also based just on the last year he has had a series of dramatic and worrying injuries and often looks as if he is playing in debilitating pain. In tennis terms he is no spring chicken either being just a matter of months younger than Nadal (who by some is conserered practically geriatric).

Also I can understand why Murray and his fans tremble in fear at the mere mention of the word CLAY but have no fear Murray just like Nadal would have retired before any changes could be made.

socal

Yeh! to grass Masters in the USA. Don't worry about Novak as he along with Rafa will be retired before any changes are made. You live over there so maybe you could get the ball rolling. As a fan you probably have at least as much power as Rafa to do so.

legendkillarV2

Well I disagree. Nadal is arguably the biggest draw in tennis. Or if not the biggest then a very close second. It would make no sense for him to play on anything but the biggest stage. I'm sure he won't. Until he returns we will all just have to make do with analysing his every word.

If you are talking ATP, then yes I would say a close second. At the Slams, it is an open field. Is he the biggest draw at the AO? No. The FO? Maybe. Wimbledon? No. UO? No. Geogrpahics play a major part in who the fans want to see.

The thing is you sensationalise Nadal in a light like he is hard done by the tour when infact he isn't. Borg remained the biggest name in tennis without playing much in Asia throughout his career. Nadal's popularity won't decline just because he tinkers his schedule. Like I said if he cares about his career and really wants to play on, well a favourable schedule on his body at the cost of missing Masters and 500 events on HC isn't such a big price to pay for longevity and a healthy life beyond tennis.

hawkeye wrote:What "fantastic battles" are you talking about? The ones were Rafa crushed Murray or the ones were Murray battled an injured Rafa? I'm sorry if that sounds mean but I think some people need a reality check.

Not mean, just misguided. Even if you take out injuries sustained before second set tie break it only takes out one match each. Rotterdam 09 and RG 11 - to be fair that would have gone to Nadal either way . Still plenty of great battles in there. Hopefully Nadal recovers soon and we can enjoy more.

hawkeye wrote:
What "fantastic battles" are you talking about? The ones were Rafa crushed Murray or the ones were Murray battled an injured Rafa? I'm sorry if that sounds mean but I think some people need a reality check.

Oh dear, that's a very disappointing comment.

WTF 2011? Was the 3rd set TB a crushing? Or was Nadal injured?
It's not mean, it's false.

legendkillarV2 wrote:
If you are talking ATP, then yes I would say a close second.

But yet no one gives a 'rat's ass' about him... Great logic

hawkeye wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:
My hope is that the recovery period will allow for a 100% Rafa to take part in the full tour for a good few years yet. I want to see him Andy and Novak battling for years to come. That might be asking too much based on what he says about his future on hard courts, but I hope he can come back at the same level.

I hope so too
Let's hope Andy and Rafa have some more fantastic battles against each other in the future

And who knows, maybe the people who are gleeful he is injured and don't give a 'rat's ass' about him will one day be able to watch some glorious classics from Rafa and Andy, and change their mind.

What "fantastic battles" are you talking about? The ones were Rafa crushed Murray or the ones were Murray battled an injured Rafa? I'm sorry if that sounds mean but I think some people need a reality check.

Danny_1982. You still perhaps are reading what you want to read from that interview. If you really are a Murray fan you should be worried about him lolloping about on hard courts considering he has such a huge 6'3" frame and plays an ultra defensive style based on retrieval. Also based just on the last year he has had a series of dramatic and worrying injuries and often looks as if he is playing in debilitating pain. In tennis terms he is no spring chicken either being just a matter of months younger than Nadal (who by some is conserered practically geriatric).

Also I can understand why Murray and his fans tremble in fear at the mere mention of the word CLAY but have no fear Murray just like Nadal would have retired before any changes could be made.

I am not worried. Murray is just as likely to be injured as anyone else. This ultra defensive style you speak of is the Murray of old, not the Murray of today. A change which has been noted by the likes of Roger and Novak.

And I have no idea why you're attacking the words of IMBL. I have really enjoyed some if the Murray Nadal matches, and some of them have been great. Rafa has had much the better of the match up admittedly, which you gleefully point out.

I think that's a really childish post by you HE if I'm being honest.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:
If you are talking ATP, then yes I would say a close second.

But yet no one gives a 'rat's ass' about him... Great logic

No-one gives a rats ass about someone who's views for change make him the sole beneficiary of them.

Are you always pedantically retarded?

That comment was about the ATP/ITF in terms why should they take on a player's view who's change requests benefit himself and not the rest of the tour.

And while we're on the subject, you do neither Rafa or his fans any favours by claiming he has only lost to Murray when he's injured. Critics of Rafa and his fans have always derided that he and his fans always claim injury after a loss, an accusation which I think is unfair on a lot if his his followers.

And yet here you are, living up to that stereotype. Thank goodness not allRafa fans are the same.

Danny_1982 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:
My hope is that the recovery period will allow for a 100% Rafa to take part in the full tour for a good few years yet. I want to see him Andy and Novak battling for years to come. That might be asking too much based on what he says about his future on hard courts, but I hope he can come back at the same level.

I hope so too
Let's hope Andy and Rafa have some more fantastic battles against each other in the future

And who knows, maybe the people who are gleeful he is injured and don't give a 'rat's ass' about him will one day be able to watch some glorious classics from Rafa and Andy, and change their mind.

What "fantastic battles" are you talking about? The ones were Rafa crushed Murray or the ones were Murray battled an injured Rafa? I'm sorry if that sounds mean but I think some people need a reality check.

Danny_1982. You still perhaps are reading what you want to read from that interview. If you really are a Murray fan you should be worried about him lolloping about on hard courts considering he has such a huge 6'3" frame and plays an ultra defensive style based on retrieval. Also based just on the last year he has had a series of dramatic and worrying injuries and often looks as if he is playing in debilitating pain. In tennis terms he is no spring chicken either being just a matter of months younger than Nadal (who by some is conserered practically geriatric).

Also I can understand why Murray and his fans tremble in fear at the mere mention of the word CLAY but have no fear Murray just like Nadal would have retired before any changes could be made.

I am not worried. Murray is just as likely to be injured as anyone else. This ultra defensive style you speak of is the Murray of old, not the Murray of today. A change which has been noted by the likes of Roger and Novak.

And I have no idea why you're attacking the words of IMBL. I have really enjoyed some if the Murray Nadal matches, and some of them have been great. Rafa has had much the better of the match up admittedly, which you gleefully point out.

I think that's a really childish post by you HE if I'm being honest.

Spot on Danny

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Are you always pedantically retarded?

Don't think so.
Thanks for asking though Definitely with comments like that you are proving Socal (top of Page 2) wrong.

legendkillarV2 wrote:
That comment was about the ATP/ITF in terms why should they take on a player's view who's change requests benefit himself and not the rest of the tour.

Was it?
You said 'no one', not the ATP.
You said, 'No-one gives a rats ass about someone who's views for change make him the sole beneficiary of them.' If that someone is Nadal, then you are saying 'no one gives a rats ass about Nadal.'
If that isn't what you meant you could have been clearer.

Danny_1982 wrote:HE - Fair point. He calls for a change but doesn't specifically say clay or grass. I'm sure I've heard him call for more clay tournaments before, but I can't find any evidence of it so I'll retract my (minor) criticism of him.

Yes, he never mentioned clay in this interview.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Are you always pedantically retarded?

Don't think so.
Thanks for asking though Definitely with comments like that you are proving Socal (top of Page 2) wrong.

And? Your actions are that anyone who speaks out against Nadal is a hater. Great insight.

legendkillarV2 wrote:
That comment was about the ATP/ITF in terms why should they take on a player's view who's change requests benefit himself and not the rest of the tour.

Was it?
You said 'no one', not the ATP.
You said, 'No-one gives a rats ass about someone who's views for change make him the sole beneficiary of them.' If that someone is Nadal, then you are saying 'no one gives a rats ass about Nadal.'
If that isn't what you meant you could have been clearer.

How clear did it need to be? I didn't mention Nadal and yet you assumed it was. If your unsure why not ask for clarification instead of getting on the high horse eh.

It was pretty clear from the context you were referring to Nadal there.
In the earlier line you said the 'tennis world has coped very well in his absence.' The next line you said how Nadal can change his schedule.

So in the context it was obvious you were referring to Nadal

Don't try and cover things up

This is where rational thinking has gone out the window.

What this thread has shown is that despite LF producing sterling work on the ratio of court surfaces, people still feel that 2 HC Slams are 2 too much. This is despite the fact that the US Open has been Clay, Grass and HC and that the Australian Open has been Grass and HC. What is clearly obvious is that Nadal fans are the ones who are calling for this change. Why? Because it is detrimental to the benefit of Nadal and no-one else. I am sorry but I am not going to jump on this bandwagon as it is a selfsih view to have. Take lydian. A big Nadal fan, but is striving for change for the future and health of the game beyond it's current stars. Other Nadal fans have the attitude of short term gains for him without any consideration for the game.

Now in relation to all this 'Your hard on HE' how about I say you are hard on anyone speaks out against Nadal. Because I have seen you run down anyone's who's opinion has been critical of Nadal. And as for socal, he literally spews out forced opinions that everything conspires against Djokovic. If it rains the god's have it in for him. Infact his behaviour drove a particular poster away from this forum. Everyone even the mild mannered JHM have tried to reason with his opinion only to be fought off with nonsense. So let me ask you this. Do you find it appropriate for Murray supporters to read and tolerate the garbage she writes about Murray because she is a Nadal fan and not respound in a negative way? Do you find it appropriate that you can pick on posters who display and write negative articles about Nadal and turn it into a witch hunt because you think that your opinion is much more correct?

Posters can agree with me or they can disagree with me. Either way I find some middle ground to sign off on. I have seen some constructive criticisms of Murray and even myself dished them out too. If you don't agree with people's opinions, fine. Just don't preach the whole I am an aggressive poster, when you sought this confrontation out yourself.